can someone please explain to me why this wasnt a td

[tatommack]

its the 48 yard bomb from romo to dez i thought the ball had to break the plain thats it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7liU1xCIfPo

[4TH AND STUPID]

feet landed out of bounds. must have both feet in bounds and possession of football.

[KKoz9]

Still a hellacious catch, and upon review, the dude tackled him before the ball got there and should have been flagged

[tatommack]

Still a hellacious catch, and upon review, the dude tackled him before the ball got there and should have been flagged

right i didnt understand why this wasnt a flag he would have came down inbounds?

[Double_Tap]

That is no longer a rule. The coming down due to a push out. But yes the early hit = FLAG

[infamousbacardi]

Certainly could have been pass interference...but that's a judgment call. And as stated above, he never had control of the ball in bounds. If his elbow had hit before his heel, it looked like his elbow would have certainly been in bounds...most likely he would have been in for 6.

[D3 Mighty Ducks]

He wasn't inbounds thats why the TD didn't count.

[hitman2010]

To get a touchdown: both feet inbound.

[cant call it]

because when he jumped in the air, his feet came down in the white marker area which is considered out of bounds. In college you only have to get 1 foot inbounds (green instead of white) and in the pro's you have to have two feet inbounds. He did not get either foot inbounds. There most definitely should have been a flag on that though.

[Rig]

need possession in play + break plain

[ehp6737]

its the 48 yard bomb from romo to dez i thought the ball had to break the plain thats it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7liU1xCIfPo

On a running play yes, but on a pass must establish possession AND have both feet in bounds or in this case his back in bounds, but his feet hit out of bounds simultaneously with his back hitting the endzone